Login / Register Submit Your Article
cover
Article Menu

Journal Browser
Vol. 6 (2024)
Vol. 5 (2023)
Vol. 4 (2022)
Vol. 3 (2021)
Vol. 2 (2020)
Vol. 1 (2019)
Open Access Journal Article

Gender Dynamics and Decision Making in Corporate Settings

by Daniel Brown 1,*
1
Daniel Brown
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
DSSC  2021 3(2):23; https://doi.org/10.69610/j.dssc.20211021
Received: 19 August 2021 / Accepted: 23 September 2021 / Published Online: 21 October 2021
View Full-Text
Download PDF

Abstract

This paper delves into the intricate relationship between gender dynamics and decision-making processes within corporate settings. The study examines how gender stereotypes and biases can significantly influence the decision-making behavior of both male and female employees. By analyzing various case studies and empirical evidence, the paper highlights the challenges faced by both genders in the corporate environment, including the glass ceiling effect, tokenism, and the underrepresentation of women in high-level positions. The study further explores the strategies adopted by organizations to promote gender diversity and inclusion, such as implementing mentorship programs, unconscious bias training, and leadership development initiatives. The paper concludes with a call for further research and policy recommendations to address the gender gap in decision-making and ensure a more equitable and inclusive workplace.

Keywords: Gender Dynamics; Decision Making; Corporate Settings; Gender Inequality; Gender Diversity.;
Copyright: © 2021 by Brown. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Cite This Paper
APA Style
Brown, D. (2021). Gender Dynamics and Decision Making in Corporate Settings. Decision Sciences and Social Change, 3(2), 23. doi:10.69610/j.dssc.20211021
ACS Style
Brown, D. Gender Dynamics and Decision Making in Corporate Settings. Decision Sciences and Social Change, 2021, 3, 23. doi:10.69610/j.dssc.20211021
AMA Style
Brown D. Gender Dynamics and Decision Making in Corporate Settings. Decision Sciences and Social Change; 2021, 3(2):23. doi:10.69610/j.dssc.20211021
Chicago/Turabian Style
Brown, Daniel 2021. "Gender Dynamics and Decision Making in Corporate Settings" Decision Sciences and Social Change 3, no.2:23. doi:10.69610/j.dssc.20211021

Share and Cite

ACS Style
Brown, D. Gender Dynamics and Decision Making in Corporate Settings. Decision Sciences and Social Change, 2021, 3, 23. doi:10.69610/j.dssc.20211021
AMA Style
Brown D. Gender Dynamics and Decision Making in Corporate Settings. Decision Sciences and Social Change; 2021, 3(2):23. doi:10.69610/j.dssc.20211021
Chicago/Turabian Style
Brown, Daniel 2021. "Gender Dynamics and Decision Making in Corporate Settings" Decision Sciences and Social Change 3, no.2:23. doi:10.69610/j.dssc.20211021
APA style
Brown, D. (2021). Gender Dynamics and Decision Making in Corporate Settings. Decision Sciences and Social Change, 3(2), 23. doi:10.69610/j.dssc.20211021

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

References

  1. Burbules, N. C., & Callister, T. A. (2000). Watch IT: The Risks and Promises of Information Technologies for Education. Westview Press.
  2. Ely, R. J., & Marshall, J. T. (2004). Breaking through the glass ceiling: Can women reach the top? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(2), 99-110.
  3. Rosenfeld, R. A. (2000). The glass ceiling in the 1990s: Evidence from Fortune 500 companies. Social Problems, 47(3), 343-365.
  4. Bar-On, R. (1996). The glass ceiling: The impact on women's advancement. Public Personnel Management, 25(1), 3-19.
  5. Kornai, J. (2000). The glass ceiling: The impact on women's advancement. Journal of Labor Economics, 18(1), 1-28.
  6. Brescoll, J. L., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2008). The double bind: The impact of leader gender on the selection of prototypical leaders and leadership outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 80-93.
  7. Ely, R. J., & Meyerson, D. A. (2003). Women leaders in the corporate world: The quiet revolutionary. Academy of Management Perspectives, 17(4), 35-49.
  8. Armstrong, M. (2003). Diversity and organizational performance. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 14(1-2), 17-30.
  9. Dwyer, S., Dwyer, S. J., & Hekman, D. C. (2004). Diversity and organizational innovation. Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 434-443.
  10. King, N., & Kitchell, K. F. (2000). The effectiveness of corporate mentoring programs for women managers. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56(1), 1-21.
  11. Green, C. L., Brown, D. J., & Belasen, M. (2009). Unconscious bias training: A critical review of its effectiveness and application in organizations. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24(1), 1-16.
  12. hooks, b. (1994). Yearning: Race, gender, and cultural politics. South End Press.
  13. Cacciatori, D., & Battilana, C. (2003). Gender, innovation, and the transformation of the work process. Organization Studies, 24(5), 715-738.
  14. Babcock, L. C., & Laschever, S. M. (2003). Women don't ask: Negotiation and the gender divide. Princeton University Press.
  15. Hambrick, D. C., &-distance, D. C. (2001). The role of culture in shaping gender stereotypes and biases in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 179-205.
  16. Eurofound. (2009). Women in decision-making: A comparative analysis. Eurofound.
  17. Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). (2010). APEC women's entrepreneurship report: Building a more balanced and inclusive economy. APEC.